If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will need to register and pay
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. Unregistered visitors can leave comments on the articles, your comments will not be visible until a moderator has approved it.

Lost in all of the BCS hand-wringing

is the likelihood that Alabama and LSU would have played for the championship no matter what system was in place. If they had each played one more game (against Oklahoma State and Stanford?), would that have made a rematch more legitimate?

Why? It still would have been the same two teams that faced off earlier in the season. It still would have been undefeated LSU vs one-loss Alabama. After 14 games, would one more game have made a difference?

is the likelihood that Alabama and LSU would have played for the championship no matter what system was in place. If they had each played one more game (against Oklahoma State and Stanford?), would that have made a rematch more legitimate?

Why? It still would have been the same two teams that faced off earlier in the season. It still would have been undefeated LSU vs one-loss Alabama. After 14 games, would one more game have made a difference?

based on some of the comments I have read, there are those who think OSU and Oregon could have beaten LSU now. Because we all know that OSU and Oregon both have outstanding defenses that could have made LSU look as silly as Bama did. If I am not mistaken, Oregon had their chance to beat LSU earlier this year while LSU had several key players out on suspension and we all know how that turned out.

That's not what he said you ignorant wretch. Your Spanish is worse than your English! - Johnny Ringo.

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

based on some of the comments I have read, there are those who think OSU and Oregon could have beaten LSU now. Because we all know that OSU and Oregon both have outstanding defenses that could have made LSU look as silly as Bama did. If I am not mistaken, Oregon had their chance to beat LSU earlier this year while LSU had several key players out on suspension and we all know how that turned out.

I'm not sure Oregon is in the discussion. A +1 would have had Stanford, Okie St, Alab, and LSU.

One of the hardest decisions you'll ever face in life is whether to walk away or try harder.

I'm not sure Oregon is in the discussion. A +1 would have had Stanford, Okie St, Alab, and LSU.

I would love to see OSU attack the Alabama defense. They might struggle, but they also might make some big plays. Its intriguing. On the other hand, I also liked watching two great defenses go at it last night as well. Alabama's D is monstrous. I shudder to think how Martinez would have looked going up against that.

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

But even when it is decided on the field, people won't accept the results. See last night's game for an example.

I think they would. It's not the result from last night, it was the process that created the matchup. If the two teams were to have met in a playoff involving more than the two teams, it would have been much more acceptable.

I always turn to the sports pages first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures. Earl Warren

I think they will. People generally accept the winner of the playoffs in all the other football divisions, and the Super Bowl, and the basketball tournament, etc.

How many teams are required for it to count as a "playoff?" The top two seeds played yesterday.

I wasn't alive when this was the case, but major league baseball's postseason used to consist of just the World Series, with the two best teams competing for the crown. The NFL didn't even have a championship game, and instead just awarded their championship to the team with the best record. Eventually, they had the top two teams play for the championship.

Those sports have changed their formats because their league structure allows them to do so and still maintain relative competitive equality in their divisions/conferences. Major college football can't do that without a complete and total realignment.

I think they would. It's not the result from last night, it was the process that created the matchup. If the two teams were to have met in a playoff involving more than the two teams, it would have been much more acceptable.

Why? Over the course of 3 months and 13/14 games, didn't they prove that they were the two best teams in the country?

Even so, most playoffs don't always include the BEST teams, just the teams that win divisions/conferences. That really doesn't prove superiority.

I think they would. It's not the result from last night, it was the process that created the matchup. If the two teams were to have met in a playoff involving more than the two teams, it would have been much more acceptable.

Notre Dame only had one Rudy but Nebraska gets a new crop of Rudys every season